Recently the board software has been updated and there are some known bugs/failures:
- Avatars are currently not being displayed✔ FIXED
- Tapatalk connection is currently broken✔ FIXED
- Avatars cannot be uploaded✔ FIXED

I would use special, internal nipples. The whole difference between my option and common wheels with internal nipples is slighty bigger hole for nipple. Please see, that contact area between rim and nipple is the same in my 2 options.

My reasons: 1) option with internal nipples will be much cheaper for me2) slightly more aero due to internal nipples3) slighty more aero due to longer aero section in spoke.

If you are a top lever time trialist with every other aero aid going then doing away with exposed nipples I suppose make sence. If the above does not apply then I really don't see the point. Even in fast racing the advantage is goin to to very small indeed. If you are as fast as me then there really is no point at all. I need to something about my pace.

I'm not time trialist, but in season 2013 I'll be racing with Polish PROs, in hardest Polish races except Tour de Pologne. But aero isn't the main reason, the main reason is unluckily money. I'm 18 years old high school student and I need to count every penny.

Zezipl,the nipples you picture, as far as I know, are for external truing: the longer part goes through the rim. You should be able to tell. If the threads in the short side of the nipple go right to the exit, that end should be up. All nipples have a section of hole that is unthreaded where the spoke enters.American Classic patented those nipples, they allow the nipple head to be held in compression instead of in tension...

I've just ordered shorter spokes for standard nipples, I'm not so brave to chech if internal nipples with standard rim will be save.It would be good idea to start making internal nipples for standard rims, something like these cnspokes, but upside-down and with 3mm of rounded section in the inside.

4x on a 28 hole wheel would seem to be too extreme. The optimal orientation is for the spoke to be exiting the flange perpendicular to an imaginary line crossing the center of the hub and the center of the specific spoke hole used.

Sorry, the following is just a summary ramble of what I have learnt thus far ... wrote:

It would appear, depending on hub dia, that a 28H 4x lacing would result in the spokes having a greater than tangential flange departure. It would appear that even though a tangential flange departure (3x, 4x, or even 5x) is the excellent for transmitting power/torque (torsional stiffness), or when braking with a Disc/Hub brake, it isn't as good for supporting weight or taking bumps. It would appear that it's usually best that spoke flange departure is less than tangential (more perpendicular), especially as tangential departure will bring a spoke very close to the head of the first spoke it crosses, which can create problems such as premature spoke wear (breakage) due to the friction created by spoke/spoke head contact.

It would appear that to get a strong and stiff wheel spoke interlacing is required, and this is where 2x/3x/4x improve, re supporting weight or taking bumps, as the wheel becomes less like a spoked wheel and more like a solid one. It would appear that interlacing reduces spoke friction where spoke friction consumes energy, causes spoke breakage due friction and fatigue, and theoretically makes your wheel slower. This is why the low NDS tension is an issue, where some have resorted to tieing spokes together at the cross, although this won't completely prevent spoke flex.

It would appear that to build an acceptably strong/stiff wheel, that DS/NDS bracing angle should be at least 10 degrees ...

It would appear that less spoke flex/friction is achieved by using higher spoke tensions, which requires stronger Rims, Spokes, Nipples, and Hub Flanges to be used. This is also achieved through spoke interlacing, which is a safer and more durable option than using high spoke tensions. Downside of Interlacing is that it requires more spokes to used and as such will produce a heavier wheel. Spokes such as Sapim Laser/CX-Ray, MAC 424/360, DT AeroLite, Pillar Bladed, etc help with the weight penalty and the higher spoke tensions ...

It would appear that DS/NDS spoke tension do not need to be equal, although better Lateral Stiffness is achieved if they are equal. For Dished Wheels, flange spacing appears to help with DS/NDS spoke tensions, as does 20:10 4xDS 0xNDS, 18:9 3xDS 0xNDS, 16:8 2xDS 0xNDS, 2:1 Triplet 2xDS 0xNDS, 4xDS 2xNDS, 2xDS 3xNDS, 0xDS 1xNDS or 2xNDS lacings ...

It would appear that Radial stiffness is achieved though 2x/3x/4x interlaced lacing patterns, Rim strength, and Spoke tension. The reason 1x is not much stronger than 0x is because it cannot be interlaced and is probably only used because the hub flanges are not strong enough for radial lacing or it perhaps assists a little with more even spoke tensions ...

I have probably missed quite alot, but does this sound right ...

Last edited by KLabs on Sat Jan 26, 2013 10:05 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum